Archived: Ruby Care

We considered our inspection findings to answer questions we always ask; Is the service safe? Is the service effective? Is the service caring? Is the service responsive? Is the service well led? This is a summary of what we found.

Is the service safe?

We found that the service was individually tailored to people's care needs and that people were treated with dignity and respect by the staff. There were systems, policies and procedures in place which ensured risks to people were reduced and that the service was safe.

Risk assessments had been undertaken and we were shown examples where these had been followed by staff. People were given choice and remained in control of decisions about their care and lives.

Policies and procedures in place ensured that risk was reduced, unsafe practice was identified and people were protected.

Is the service effective?

Everyone who used the agency had received a needs assessment and were involved in the development of their care plan. Care plans examined were clear in explaining what care and support was needed. Daily records were detailed and up to date which showed us that staff provided the appropriate care and support specified in the care plan.

Is the service caring?

We spoke with three people who received a service about the care they received. They told us that staff were reliable and on time. One person said, 'the service is first class. I can do much more for myself now' and another said, 'they (the agency and staff) are just perfect, I am so lucky'. We observed friendly, caring, interactions between people and the staff who knew each other well.

We spoke with two members of staff who told us they 'loved' working with people in the community and enjoyed helping people to maintain their independence.

Is the service responsive?

The agency was able to respond quickly to any request from people or their families to change or amend the planned service. People were aware of the complaints procedure but none had any complaint. They told us communication with staff and the office was easy and they had no hesitation in making contact if there was ever any concern.

Is the service well led?

The agency had formal systems in place to monitor the quality of the service provided. There was a clear management structure place and lines of accountability were clear. Staff had a good understanding of the ethos of the agency and to quality processes in place. The provider was actively involved in the day to day operation of the service and committed, alongside other staff to continuous improvement of the service.

The person that we met with was very happy with the care and support they received from the agency.

Care plans that we read gave details of the person's daily routines and the tasks that they required assistance with. This meant that staff were able to fit tasks around people's routines. One person told us 'The staff are really flexible and they fit around me.'

All staff who worked for the agency were also employed to work in the care home which was owned by the same provider. We saw records which showed that staff received training about abuse during their induction period. They also received further training in safeguarding vulnerable adults after they had completed their induction. This ensured that staff were aware of how to recognise all forms of abuse and how to report it to the relevant authorities.

Staff files gave evidence of a robust recruitment process which ensured that new staff had the relevant skills and were of good character. The recruitment procedure also minimised the risks of abuse to people who used the service by making sure that all staff were thoroughly checked before beginning work.

Staff who worked for the agency also worked at the care home owned by the same provider. There was an ongoing training programme in place which ensured that staff had up to date skills and knowledge to work in the care home and the community.

We were told by relatives that when staff visited people in their own homes they were 'respectful, polite and smart.' One relative said that everything was 'organised wonderfully' another said 'from the very beginning everyone was helpful, obliging and professional.'

People we spoke with were very happy with the care that they received from the agency. Both relatives we spoke with praised the flexibility of the service and said that the staff worked around their needs and wishes. One relative said 'I can't speak highly enough of the service, they all go the extra mile.'

We were told that people received the same carer which provided consistency for the person using the service. Relatives said that the fact that it was a small agency enabled them to build a relationship with the staff who supported their family member. We were told 'they contact me to share information and I always feel able to call them if I have any concerns.'